Mary Ainsworth - Strange Situation

Bowlby (1969) believed that attachment was an all or nothing process.  However, research has shown that there are individual differences in attachment quality.  Indeed one of the primary paradigms in attachment theory is that of the security of an individual’s attachment (Ainsworth 1970, 1978).

Much research in psychology has focused on how forms of attachment differ between infants. For example, Schaffer and Emerson (1964) discovered what appeared to be innate differences in sociability in babies; some babies preferred cuddling more than others, from very early on, before much interaction had occurred to cause such differences.

However, it was probably the psychologist Mary Ainsworth (1913 - 1999) who provided the most famous body of research offering explanations of individual differences in attachment.

It’s easy enough to know when you are attached to someone because you know how you feel when you are apart from that person, and, being an adult, you can put your feelings into words and describe how it feels.

However, most attachment research is carried out using infants and young children, so psychologists have to devise subtle ways of researching attachment, using involving the observational method.

Psychologist Mary Ainsworth devised an assessment technique called the Strange Situation Classification (SSC) in order to investigate how attachments might vary between children.

Ainsworth and Bell (1970) observational study of individual differences in attachment is described below.

Strange Situation Procedure

The security of attachment in one- to two-year-olds was investigated by Ainsworth and Bell (1970) in the 'strange situation' study, in order to determine the nature of attachment behaviors and types of attachment.

Ainsworth (1970) developed an experimental procedure in order to observe the variety of attachment forms exhibited between mothers and infants.

The experiment is set up in a small room with one way glass so the behavior of the infant can be observed.  Infants were aged between 12 and 18 months.  The sample comprised about 100 middle class American families.

The procedure, known as the ‘Strange Situation’, was conducted by observing the behavior of the infant in a series of seven 3-minute episodes, as follows (click on the image below):

(1) Parent and infant alone.

(2) Stranger joins parent and infant.

(3) Parent leaves infant and stranger alone.

(4) Parent returns and stranger leaves.

(5) Parent leaves; infant left completely alone.

(6) Stranger returns.

(7) Parent returns and stranger leaves.

Four categories of behaviors are measured and observed: (1) separation anxiety: the unease the infant shows when left by the caregiver, (2) the infant’s willingness to explore, (3) stranger anxiety: the infant’s response to the presence of a stranger, and (4) reunion behavior: the way the caregiver was greeted on return. The observer notes down the behavior displayed and scores the behavior for intensity on a scale 1 to 7.

Strange Situation Findings

Her set of observational studies using the ‘Strange Situation’ paradigm (see above) revealed three distinct forms of attachment (‘attachment styles’).  One secure attachment style and two types of insecure attachments.

Ainsworth (1970) identified three main attachment styles, secure, avoidant and resistant/ambivalent. She concluded that these attachment styles were the result of early interactions with the mother. A forth attachment style known as disorganized was later identified (Main, & Solomon, 1990).

Securely attached children comprised the majority of the sample in Ainsworth’s (1970) study. Such children feel confident that the attachment figure (AF) will be available to meet their needs. They use the AF as a safe base to explore the environment and seek the AF in times of distress (Main, & Cassidy, 1988). Securely attached infants are easily soothed by the AF when upset. Infants develop a secure attachment when the caregiver is sensitive to their signals, and responds appropriately to their needs.

Insecure avoidant children do not orientate to their AF while investigating the environment. They are very independent of the AF, both physically and emotionally (Behrens, Hesse, & Main, 2007). They do not seek contract with the AF when distressed. Such children are likely to have a caregiver who is insensitive and rejecting of their needs (Ainsworth, 1979). The AF may withdraw from helping during difficult tasks (Stevenson-Hinde, & Verschueren, 2002) and is often unavailable during times of emotional distress.

The third attachment style identified by Ainsworth (1970) was insecure resistant. Here children adopt an ambivalent behavioral style towards the primary caregiver. The child will commonly exhibit clingy and dependent behavior, but will be rejecting of the AF when they engage in interaction. The child fails to develop any feelings of security from the AF. Accordingly they exhibit difficulty moving away from the AF to explore novel surroundings. When distressed they are difficult to soothe and are not comforted by interaction with the AF. This behavior results from an inconsistent level of response to their needs from the primary caregiver.

Strange Situation Conclusion

Ainsworth & Bell suggested that behavior in the strange situation classification was determined by the behavior of the primary carer (in this case the mother).

For example, securely attached infant are associated with sensitive & responsive primary care.

Insecure Resistant attached infants are associated with inconsistent primary care. Sometimes the child’s needs and met and sometime they are ignored by the mother.

Insecure Avoidant infants are associated with unresponsive primary care. The child comes to believe that communication of needs has no influence on the mother.

Ainsworth’s (1970) findings provided the first empirical evidence for Bowlby’s attachment theory .

For example, securely attached children develop a positive working model of themselves and have mental representations of others as being helpful while viewing themselves as worthy of respect (Jacobsen & Hoffman, 1997).

Avoidant children think themselves unworthy and unacceptable, caused by a rejecting primary caregiver (Larose & Bernier, 2001).

Resistant children have negative self image and exaggerate their emotional responses as a way to gain attention (Kobak et al., 1993).  Accordingly, insecure attachment styles are associated with an increased risk of social and emotional behavioral problems via the internal working model.

Evaluation of The Strange Situation

The strange situation classification has been found to have good reliability.  This means that it achieves consistent results.  For example, a study conducted in Germany found 78% of the children were classified in the same way at ages 1 and 6 years (Wartner, et al. 1994).

The strange situation classification has become the accepted methodology worldwide for measuring attachment.

Mary Ainsworth's conclusion that the strange situation can be used to identify the child's type of attachment has been criticized on the grounds that it identifies only the type of attachment to the mother. The child may have a different type of attachment to the father or grandmother, for example (Lamb, 1977). This means that is lacks validity, as it is not measuring a general attachment style, but instead an attachment style specific to the mother.

In addition, some research has shown that the same child may show different attachment behaviors on different occasions. Children's attachments may change, perhaps because of changes in the child's circumstances, so a securely attached child may appear insecurely attached if the mother becomes ill or the family circumstances change.

The strange situation has also been criticized on ethical grounds. Because the child is put under stress (separation and stranger anxiety), the study has broken the ethical guideline protection of participants.

The sample is biased -100 middle class American families. Therefore, it is difficult to generalize the findings outside of America and to working class families.

Finally, the observational study has been criticized for having low ecological validity.  Because the child is place in a strange and artificial environment, due to the procedure of the mother and stranger following a predetermined script.

Attachment Theory PDF Downloads

The Effects of Childcare on Social Development

The Origins of Attachment Theory: Bowlby and Ainsworth

Attachment Theory PowerPoint Downloads

Ainsworth Strange Situation

Audio

Mary Ainsworth

References

Ainsworth, M. D. S., & Bell, S. M. (1970). Attachment, exploration, and separation: Illustrated by the behavior of one-year-olds in a strange situation. Child Development, 41, 49-67.

Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of Attachment: A Psychological Study of the Strange Situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment. Attachment and Loss: Vol. 1. Loss. New York: Basic Books.

Jacobsen, T. & Hoffman, V. (1997). Children’s attachment representations: Longitudinal relations to school behavior and academic competency in middle childhood and adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 33, 703-710.

Kobak, R. R., Cole, H. E., Ferenz-Gillies, R., Flemming, W. S., & Gamble, W. (1993). Attachment and emotional regulation during mother-teen problem-solving. A control theory analysis. Child Development, 64, 231-245.

Lamb, M. E. (1977). The development of mother-infant and father-infant attachments in the second year of life. Developmental Psychology, 13, 637-48.

Larose, S., & Bernier, A. (2001). Social support processes: Mediators of attachment state of mind and adjustment in later late adolescence. Attachment and Human Development, 3, 96-120.

Main, M., & Solomon, J. (1990). "Procedures for identifying infants as disorganized/disoriented during the Ainsworth Strange Situation". M.T. Greenberg, D. Cicchetti & E.M. Cummings (Eds.), Attachment in the Preschool Years (pp. 121–160). Chicago, University of Chicago Press.

Schaffer H R and Emerson P E (1964) ‘The Development of Social Attachments in Infancy’. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 29 (3), serial number 94.

Wartner, U. G., Grossman, K., Fremmer-Bombik, I., & Guess, G. L. (1994). Attachment patterns in south Germany. Child Development, 65, pp. 1014-27.

How to cite this article: McLeod, S. A. (2008). Simply Psychology; . Retrieved from